Traded Bryce Gibbs [traded to Adelaide] - (cont. in Part 2)

[marty36]

Rowe is a best 22 player. What will you trade?

Will just wait for the players union to do away with FA and grab him for zippo

 

[Danger in Texas]

Sorry, my bad but it came up on page 1 Must be a slow off season

Very slow. January's always the worst, honestly.

Anyway, we're happy with our lot, you're happy with your lot, let's move on

 

[Monkey King]

Could have a first rounder running around for them in 5 years time when they're actually back in the top 8 instead of Gibbs for 2-3 years.

Nah thanks. Gibbs is good for the development of young lads drafted last year through to next. One extra late first rounder would mean s**t all if we're just to overburden all the young fellas by too young too soon. I know you Crow posters like to pretend that somehow Carlton erred in keeping Gibbs, but you're just going to have to face it; your club preferred Gibbs to pick 15 and chips and so did Carlton. Personally, I think both clubs were right.

 

[Weiterbot23]

Gibbs would have helped Adelaide now (while contending) and a first round pick would have helped Carlton in 5 years (when hopefully contending), I still find it strange it didn't get done somehow.

We would have been real real bad in the guts without Gibbs this year though, way too young so probably why, but surely the same deal would be accepted next trade period if offered?

 

[JD Tomahawk]

Should have been done. Would have been good for both clubs. I dare say Carlton would have actually come out ahead. Maybe Trigg got involved out of spite

 

[Old navy]

Should have been done. Would have been good for both clubs. I dare say Carlton would have actually come out ahead. Maybe Trigg got involved out of spite

Really think we are better off with Bryce Gibbs in our midfield this year, will take a lot of heat off our young midfielders.
Gibbs looks like he could be in for big year, has come back to the club in excellent condition, we could get the same deal for him in a years time, in potentially a better draft or we keep Gibbs on our books to help our young midfielders develope.

 

[bmaurizio]

I'm confident we'll get the same offer or deal again this year's trade period.
An addiontal year will not diminish Gibbs value one bit, he's a very durable and elite footballer in fact I'm expecting a stellar performance this year to showcase his professionalism and commitment.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I'm confident we'll get the same offer or deal again this year's trade period.
An addiontal year will not diminish Gibbs value one bit, he's a very durable and elite footballer in fact I'm expecting a stellar performance this year to showcase his professionalism and commitment.

I doubt Adelaide will give up 2 x 1st rounders for a player with only a few years left.

Will be looking at other younger options.

 

[Dc9798]

I doubt Adelaide will give up 2 x 1st rounders for a player with only a few years left.

Will be looking at other younger options.

I think bmaurizo means what the Crows where offering last year, not what Carlton where asking for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I think bmaurizo means what the Crows where offering this year, not what Carlton where asking for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I doubt the Crows will even offer a 1st rounder for Gibbs next year - horse has bolted & will move on to younger targets available.

 

[Drewie11]

I doubt the Crows will even offer a 1st rounder for Gibbs next year - horse has bolted & will move on to younger targets available.

I don't think they will go after him this year either. Not with Galluci, Poholke and Jackson Edwards in this years draft. I think they will go after Harrison Himmelberg if he can't break into the GWS team

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I don't think they will go after him this year either. Not with Galluci, Poholke and Jackson Edwards in this years draft. I think they will go after Harrison Himmelberg if he can't break into the GWS team

Agree & if we feel we need to bolster our midfield, there are other out of contract players, including free agents who won't require the payment of the special SOS premium.

 

[Monkey King]

Agree & if we feel we need to bolster our midfield, there are other out of contract players, including free agents who won't require the payment of the special SOS premium.

Yeah. I'd say it's probably best if you blokes stick to chasing uncontracted fringe players. Seems that without these kind of leverage points, your club isn't really sure how to get a trade through.

 

[Mego Red]

Yeah. I'd say it's probably best if you blokes stick to chasing uncontracted fringe players. Seems that without these kind of leverage points, your club isn't really sure how to get a trade through.

No, we absolutely can. But we're a professional, well-managed club, so we don't overpay. We pay a fair price for a player we need. That should be obvious.

 

[Monkey King]

No, we absolutely can. But we're a professional, well-managed club, so we don't overpay. We pay a fair price for a player we need. That should be obvious.

Not obvious at all. The Crows handled this like Carlton somehow had to just accept your initial offer because the player requested to go home. It was handled far more like an uncontracted player situation. That part is obvious. Which is why I said, best stick to targeting those players where this leverage actually exists.

 

[slashin_velvet]

No, we absolutely can. But we're a professional, well-managed club, so we don't overpay. We pay a fair price for a player we need. That should be obvious.

You should correct your statement to "we only pay what we feel is a fair price for a player we need" which would be every club's mandate. And most club's know that high end talent costs a premium.

This seems like Adelaides philosophy, as they haven't really bought in many players that were best 22 locks at the clubs they were departing. Their list from recent years is lowden, cheney, menzel, seedsman, hampton, gore.

Now there's nothing wrong with trading for players who can't make their current teams 22, but you obviously pay less as the club losing the player usually deems them surplus to needs and puts them on the table.

If menzel is worth pick 28 and kerridge, and seedsman and hampton are worth picks in the early 30s, then surely Gibbs (likely top 3 midfielder in the crows lineup as it currently stands) is worth more than picks 13 and a pick in the 50s. Compound this with the fact that he still had a long term deal, so there was no pressure to trade and you get the outcome we had.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Yeah. I'd say it's probably best if you blokes stick to chasing uncontracted fringe players. Seems that without these kind of leverage points, your club isn't really sure how to get a trade through.

Get rid of fringe, and you're probably right.

 

[Monkey King]

Get rid of fringe, and you're probably right.

Fair enough. The fringe comment was more about chasing Himmelberg I suppose. So perhaps revise my comment to - uncontracted players not strictly required by their clubs; this is probably about where the Crows price point is going by recent history.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

You should correct your statement to "we only pay what we feel is a fair price for a player we need" which would be every club's mandate. And most club's know that high end talent costs a premium.

This seems like Adelaides philosophy, as they haven't really bought in many players that were best 22 locks at the clubs they were departing. Their list from recent years is lowden, cheney, menzel, seedsman, hampton, gore.

Now there's nothing wrong with trading for players who can't make their current teams 22, but you obviously pay less as the club losing the player usually deems them surplus to needs and puts them on the table.

If menzel is worth pick 28 and kerridge, and seedsman and hampton are worth picks in the early 30s, then surely Gibbs (likely top 3 midfielder in the crows lineup as it currently stands) is worth more than picks 13 and a pick in the 50s. Compound this with the fact that he still had a long term deal, so there was no pressure to trade and you get the outcome we had.

Jenkins, Lynch, Cheney & Seedsman are 4 solid players we have traded in who play regularly in our team. 2 made the AA squad last year, so I would call then locks...

Also, now Menzel & Hampton are over their injury woes, they should also be regular contributors this year.

 

[Jeremias]

Jenkins, Lynch, Cheney & Seedsman are 4 solid players we have traded in who play regularly in our team. 2 made the AA squad last year, so I would call then locks...

None of those players were anything close to best 22 locks at the clubs they departed from.

 

[Dc9798]

You should correct your statement to "we only pay what we feel is a fair price for a player we need" which would be every club's mandate. And most club's know that high end talent costs a premium.

This seems like Adelaides philosophy, as they haven't really bought in many players that were best 22 locks at the clubs they were departing. Their list from recent years is lowden, cheney, menzel, seedsman, hampton, gore.

Now there's nothing wrong with trading for players who can't make their current teams 22, but you obviously pay less as the club losing the player usually deems them surplus to needs and puts them on the table.

If menzel is worth pick 28 and kerridge, and seedsman and hampton are worth picks in the early 30s, then surely Gibbs (likely top 3 midfielder in the crows lineup as it currently stands) is worth more than picks 13 and a pick in the 50s. Compound this with the fact that he still had a long term deal, so there was no pressure to trade and you get the outcome we had.

If Patrick Dangerfield is worth Geelong's first-round pick, second-round pick and Dean Gore, no way is Bryce Gibbs worth more than a first-round pick and a pick in the 50's.
He's a contracted Carlton player who Carlton didn't want to trade, that's it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[slashin_velvet]

None of those players were anything close to best 22 locks at the clubs they departed from.

The 2 players named who made the AA squad were Jenkins and Lynch.
Jenkins didn't play a single game for the club he was drafted to prior to Adelaide taking him = fringe player
Lynch played 6 games with the Saints over 3 seasons, and the guy they gave up to get him (Maric) made the AA squad the year after they traded him - so its not like they didn't give up anything to get him.

 

[slashin_velvet]

If Patrick Dangerfield is worth Geelong's first-round pick, second-round pick and Dean Gore, no way is Bryce Gibbs worth more than a first-round pick and a pick in the 50's.
He's a contracted Carlton player who Carlton didn't want to trade, that's it.

Gibbs signed a 5 year deal when he was eligible for Free Agency - Dangerfield was uncontracted and walked. You offered less for Gibbs than you got for Dangerfield, and yet the circumstances dictated that you probably needed to cough up more.

On an open market, Danger is worth far more than what you got, and if your club had the option of giving up that much to retain him - you probably would have because he's worth it.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

None of those players were anything close to best 22 locks at the clubs they departed from.

Which makes them good trades as we brought in players we identified as being of a need & all were bargains.

 

[Elite Crow]

Yeah. I'd say it's probably best if you blokes stick to chasing uncontracted fringe players. Seems that without these kind of leverage points, your club isn't really sure how to get a trade through.

Mate the only trades you have done have either been GWS slops or their young kids wanting back to Melbourne who have followed SOS, so you are not really in a position to judge our trading.

We can compare Free Agents though, Betts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Thomas